Rural tourism opportunities: strategies and requirements for destination leadership in peripheral areas

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to address lack in destination leadership and to propose a new typology of approaches. Frequently, rural tourism is suggested as a remedy that should enhance the local economy, create new jobs, strengthen the regional identity and finance the infrastructure.

Design/methodology/approach

Case study analysis shows that regions, communities, tourism organizations and managers use different strategies to strengthen their tourism offers or to develop new ones. The paper analyzes different development approaches among destinations and discusses their respective leadership structure.

Findings

The typology of tourism development models makes the different development options transparent and easy to understand. This may aid a community to support tourism development with spatial planning and avoid conflicts with other forms of land uses. Overall, leadership for rural tourism development should lead to a strategic cooperation between tourism businesses and other organizations based on a commitment to destination coherence.

Research limitations/implications

The chosen research approach is based on the analysis of Central European case studies. Therefore, researchers of other geographical backgrounds are encouraged to test the proposed propositions further.

Practical implications

The presented typology illustrated four distinct options of coherent development strategies, which can support communities/regions to find a long-term decision frame.

Originality/value

The presented typology facilitates collaborative planning, helps operationalize rural tourism development policies and provides the foundation for spatial planning, all of which furthers the linkages between tourism and other sectors in the rural economy.

Citation

Pröbstl-Haider, U., Melzer, V. and Jiricka, A. (2014), "Rural tourism opportunities: strategies and requirements for destination leadership in peripheral areas", Tourism Review, Vol. 69 No. 3, pp. 216-228. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-06-2013-0038